LexisNexis is providing a free download of a chapter from “The Corporate Compliance Practice Guide: The Next Generation.” An excerpt:

The CEO/President of the corporation should provide leadership for the compliance program. This includes launching the compliance program with the message from the CEO/President. This leadership at the top sets the tone for the compliance program and is an essential element of creating a culture of compliance within the corporation.

Further, top management must ensure the effectiveness of the compliance office by providing necessary personnel and funding. Top management should take a leadership role in fostering the compliance program by supporting the program in their daily activities.

Finally, ”specific high-level personnel,” which usually consists of the compliance officers in the compliance office, should be designated with the responsibility for the day-to-day operation of the compliance program. The chief compliance officer is critical to the success of the compliance program. For the compliance effort to succeed, the chief compliance officer should be afforded access to the CEO/President and the Board of Directors, as well as sufficient funding and staff. A chief compliance officer should be appointed to coordinate the activities of individual compliance ”officers” at subsidiaries. Finally, it is vital that the chief compliance officer and all other compliance officers be known for their integrity and high ethical standards.

“Trespass to chattels”?!? Isn’t that a doctrine that was dead and buried, brought up only to torment…educate first year law students? Not any more! In the electronic age, the trespass to chattels doctrine has been revived. It has been used for all sorts of claims, including anti-spam claims, network interference claims, and more.

Of course, if you’re like me, you wonder, “Is there insurance available to cover such claims?” I wrote an article, bylined with two co-authors, in which I address those questions. Risk and Insurance just published the piece.

As computer technology rapidly advances, legislatures often cannot enact laws quickly enough to respond to new cybersecurity risks. Enterprising lawyers, however, have turned to old legal doctrines for relief. The doctrine of “trespass to chattels,” for example, is an antiquated term that once was buried in the dusty pages of old law dictionaries. But lawyers who handle cybersecurity issues, including allegations of spam, viruses, worms, unauthorized access, and more, have revived the doctrine as a means of redress. For companies facing potential liabilities based on such allegations, the availability of insurance coverage is critical to navigate the nuances of the ever-changing landscape.

Is there coverage for such claims?

Although designed to cover a wide range of risks that could befall a business, many standard form “traditional” insurance policies do not explicitly mention cybersecurity or claims arising out of online activity. But look closely, because coverage can still be available. For example, commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policies, the basic insurance policies bought by thousands of companies every year, provide, in standard form, two basic coverages relevant to this question: coverage for liability arising out of “property damage” and coverage for liability arising out of “personal and advertising injury.” Both coverages might apply to potential liability for a trespass to chattels claim.

Where should a company look when facing trespass to chattels claims?

Although designed to cover a wide range of risks that could befall a business, many standard form “traditional” insurance policies do not explicitly mention cybersecurity or claims arising out of online activity. But look closely, because coverage can still be available. For example, commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policies, the basic insurance policies bought by thousands of companies every year, provide, in standard form, two basic coverages relevant to this question: coverage for liability arising out of “property damage” and coverage for liability arising out of “personal and advertising injury.” Both coverages might apply to potential liability for a trespass to chattels claim.

Like this:

Disclaimer

This blog is for informational purposes only. This may be considered attorney advertising in some states. The opinions on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the author's law firm and/or the author's past and/or current clients. By reading it, no attorney-client relationship is formed. If you want legal advice, please retain an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.

NOTE THAT ANY CASE DECISIONS, COURT OPINIONS, RULINGS, AND/OR RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

CASE RESULTS DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE UNDERTAKEN BY THE LAWYER.

About the Corporate Insurance Blog

Welcome to The Corporate Insurance Blog. This blog is for corporate policyholders, risk managers, and in-house counsel who deal with insurance policies, programs, purchases, renewals, claims, and recovery.